Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
    • Hi, we are looking to get some opinions on weather or not to bother fighting this PCN. This comes from a very big retail park parking where there are restaurants, hotel, amongst other businesses. The parking is free but I suppose there must be a time limit on it that I am not aware of. We were in the area for around 4 hours. Makes us wonder how they deal with people staying in the hotel as the ANPR is on what appears to be a publicly maintained street (where london buses run) which leads to the different parking areas including the hotel.  1 Date of the infringement 26/05/2024 2 Date on the NTK  31/05/2024 3 Date received 07/06/2024 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  YES 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Entry and exit photos however, based on the photographs we are almost sure the photos are taken on public street. This is the location I believe photos are taken from.  https://maps.app.goo.gl/eii8zSmFFhVZDRpbA 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A 7 Who is the parking company? UKPA. UK Parking Administration LTD 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] The Colonnades, Croydon, CR0 4RQ For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. British Parking Association (BPA) Thanks in advance for any assistance.  UKPA PCN The Collonades-redacted.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Game Store/DPD left playstation on doorstep/stolen - cant get refund/replacement


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 845 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

i bought a gaming console from game for my sons birthday in October.
I asked if not in to leave with my neighbour 4 doors down.
 
As i work nights I checked my emails around 4am and found that my delivery had been left on the doorstep which is open to the whole street - we dont have fencing and we were opposite a block of flats (since moved). I went to look and it wasn't there.
 
I've been in dispute with dpd and game about this issue and they are saying it was delivered ok, there's nothing that they can do.
used resolver to try help me but they've closed the case saying i now have to take it to court as a civil matter.
 
Is that indeed the only option i have now please?
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • BankFodder changed the title to DPD left playstation on doorstep which got stolen - now i cant get refund/replacement

I'm afraid it is extremely likely that you will have to do sue DPD in the County Court.

Don't worry it won't be difficult. We will help you and I expect that you will win.

Have you got evidence that you asked them to leave the console with your neighbours?

Please start reading up on the stories on the Hermes sub- forum – the Hermes stories because the route that is taken with Hermes will be the same route that you have to take.

Read up fairly thoroughly – probably a couple of dozen stories and then come back here and we will help you get started.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why bother with the uncertainty and hassle of suing DPD?  Isn't Game simply liable under s29 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015?  All the OP needs to point out - again - to Game is:

 

29 Passing of risk

(1)A sales contract is to be treated as including the following provisions as terms.

(2)The goods remain at the trader’s risk until they come into the physical possession of—

(a)the consumer, or... 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

hi - i dont suppose you can help me with the wording of an email to them please - i have fuzzy brain atm - working nights is a killer and its sooo busy atm because of covid. thanks

 

id really prefer not to sue as it seems so costly and lengthy - i just dont have the brain function or money atm for this with just moving house. Ill take the belows advice and read up on the forum too to try get my head round things - your help is appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not costly – and although it's not instant, it will probably be the only way forward.

Have a look at the Hermes threads – you will soon get to understand that it is fairly straightforward and it really is simply about filling in a few forms and then eventually having a phone call with a mediator.

What was the value of this console?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, suing Game is certainly a possibility and might be a better idea. I don't know why that notion passed me by.

However, the route will be broadly the same as well as the cost.

Have you written to Game about this?

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just write to or email Game telling them that s29(2)(a) of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 makes it perfectly clear that the trader (in this case Game) is solely responsible for the goods until they are delivered into "the physical possession" of the consumer.

 

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

 

Tell them that, for example, a photograph from DPD of a parcel on a doorstep in front of a closed door is clearly NOT evidence that Game have fulfilled their statutory obligation to deliver the goods into your "physical possession".  In fact it proves that they did not do so!

 

Tell them that you want either a full refund or a replacement console, and that if they do not comply you will start court proceedings and also claim from them your additional costs in having to do so.

 

If they don't fold at that stage - and they may not as they are clearly idiots - you need to research how to make a court claim and letters before action etc.

 

[Edit:  If they tell you to complain to DPD, tell them that DPD is their problem, not yours!]

 

 

Edited by Manxman in exile
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Game Store/DPD left playstation on doorstep/stolen - cant get refund/replacement

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 01/02/2022 at 15:46, BankFodder said:

Yes, suing Game is certainly a possibility and might be a better idea. I don't know why that notion passed me by...

 

Perfectly understandable as you spend a lot of your time explaining to posters how to get satisfaction from crap couriers like Hermes etc.

 

But in this case - happily - I think that the legislation makes it clear that Game are in straightforward breach and there's no need to pursue DPD for this - no matter how useless they are.

 

Until consumers start suing traders - when those traders are in clear breach of the legislation - , traders won't use better couriers...

Edited by Manxman in exile
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Do you have evidence that you told them to leave it at your neighbours down the street?

Link to post
Share on other sites

ill find out..... but ive a feeling that will be no - if thats the case what can they do?

 

thanks

 

hi - no they dont have actual evidence  - they just ticked the box when the delivery email came where it gave you the option to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, magoogy said:

 

they just ticked the box when the delivery email came where it gave you the option to.

 

 Sorry but I don't understand this

Link to post
Share on other sites

they said they received an email saying their parcel was on the way and that they can choose a safe place - it gave them options of where to leave it if they werent in and they ticked 'leave with neighbour at ......' - i have had these emails myself when a delivery is due and it takes you to an online form to fill in and state where you want it leaving

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still getting a bit confused.
So you have evidence that they apparently left it with a neighbour – yes?
But earlier on he said that they left on your doorstep then it disappeared.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but it's still not clear – who is "he" that asked them to leave with a neighbour…?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I understand that we have two people posting under the same username.
This may well explain the confused messages and the confusion that it is causing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay so why don't you answer the question that my site team colleague has put you above – and also why don't you blissed out a brief chronology of exactly what has happened here in bullet pointed fashion so that we got the story in one place, complete, accurate, easy to follow – you know what I mean because it seems to me that this thread has now been running for pretty well 14 days and nobody is really clear as to what is happening.

We give our time for free and it would be nice to have it taken seriously.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry i dont understand?? we are genuine - just as he works nights and hes getting nowhere with this case hes asked me to have a look at it........

 

what question are we not answering?? sorry if im confusing you - i should have explained earlier when i began using his account - its been him up to when ive commented today. sorry

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...